Stilphen v. Ware
JOHN H. STILPHEN v. WILLIAM WARE
- Area
- civil
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
By the Court:
It is conceded that irrespective of the judgment rendered against the corporation itself, the cause of action stated in the complaint is barred by limitation, and if this be so, it is clear that the judgment did not of itself operate to prolong the time in which an action might be brought against the defendants as stockholders of the corporation. (Davidson v. Rankin, 34 Cal. 503; Larrabee v. Baldwin, 35 Cal. 168; Young v. Rosenbaum, 39 Cal. 646.)
Judgment affirmed.
Cites, in this corpus
- Young v. Rosenbaum No. 1,801 · 1870-07-01
- Davidson v. Rankin · 1868-07-01
- Larrabee v. Baldwin · 1868-07-01
Cited by
- Ellsworth v. Bradford L. A. No. 6551. · 1921-06-22
- Chambers v. Farnham L. A. No. 4905. · 1920-02-06
- Douglas v. Orth Civ. No. 3030. · 1919-11-03
- Redington v. Cornwell No. 13008 · 1891-06-30
- Hyman v. Coleman No. 11448 · 1890-01-30